I sometimes think this forum isn't as good as it used to be, probably due to people's general low interest in Charlton, but threads like this prove me wrong. This would have been sunk in an instance a year ago or so, great stuff, the forum is going through a purple patch!
As for Corbyn's negotiation over war tactics, it's worked out well with Trump (how has he got mentioned on a Corbyn thread?) and Kim Jong-un (how has he got mentioned on a Corbyn thread?) recently.
Trump and Corbyn are two directly opposite sides of the same coin. Both see themselves as disrupters, both claim to be populists, both refuse to criticise their friends, both claim some kind of media conspiracy against them, both have supporters that cannot fathom any kind of criticism or thought that’s isn’t “this guy is the best thing ever”. the difference is Corbyn is not a con man and panders to the left base rather than the right base.
I sometimes think this forum isn't as good as it used to be, probably due to people's general low interest in Charlton, but threads like this prove me wrong. This would have been sunk in an instance a year ago or so, great stuff, the forum is going through a purple patch!
As for Corbyn's negotiation over war tactics, it's worked out well with Trump (how has he got mentioned on a Corbyn thread?) and Kim Jong-un (how has he got mentioned on a Corbyn thread?) recently.
Trump and Corbyn are two directly opposite sides of the same coin. Both see themselves as disrupters, both claim to be populists, both refuse to criticise their friends, both claim some kind of media conspiracy against them, both have supporters that cannot fathom any kind of criticism or thought that’s isn’t “this guy is the best thing ever”. the difference is Corbyn is not a con man and panders to the left base rather than the right base.
Pretty much, which makes it interesting when one side hates the other.
It always seems to me that the people who go rabid, foaming at the mouth about the thought of a cult of Corbyn, seem to be oblivious that they are displaying the attributes of the cult of anti-Corbyn!
Nice Corbynista smear there.
Anyone who critises the Great Leader is "rabid" and "forming at the mouth"
So you don't have to deal with the embarrassing truth of the emperor's New clothes.
No, reasonable opponents point out that whilst he is a decent bloke his policies won't work. I disagree with them, as I think Labour's policies are keynesian Social democratic ones rather than hard left ones but I could be wrong. But to call him a terrorist sympathiser or anti-semite is bordering on the ridiculous and are the behaviours of some form of cultist! Corbyn's makes errors and the way he dealt with anti-semitism could have been much better, also the way he has dealt with Brexit in my opinion, but if you want to portray him as some form of anti-christ you only show yourself up, rather than the supposed cultists you seem to think exist within your own paranoia!
I sometimes think this forum isn't as good as it used to be, probably due to people's general low interest in Charlton, but threads like this prove me wrong. This would have been sunk in an instance a year ago or so, great stuff, the forum is going through a purple patch!
As for Corbyn's negotiation over war tactics, it's worked out well with Trump (how has he got mentioned on a Corbyn thread?) and Kim Jong-un (how has he got mentioned on a Corbyn thread?) recently.
i agree we get to car park offerings much more now.
I sometimes think this forum isn't as good as it used to be, probably due to people's general low interest in Charlton, but threads like this prove me wrong. This would have been sunk in an instance a year ago or so, great stuff, the forum is going through a purple patch!
As for Corbyn's negotiation over war tactics, it's worked out well with Trump (how has he got mentioned on a Corbyn thread?) and Kim Jong-un (how has he got mentioned on a Corbyn thread?) recently.
Trump and Corbyn are two directly opposite sides of the same coin. Both see themselves as disrupters, both claim to be populists, both refuse to criticise their friends, both claim some kind of media conspiracy against them, both have supporters that cannot fathom any kind of criticism or thought that’s isn’t “this guy is the best thing ever”. the difference is Corbyn is not a con man and panders to the left base rather than the right base.
Pretty much, which makes it interesting when one side hates the other.
Which makes me think the overwhelming online presence of their support base for both comes more from st Petersburg than St Albans or St. Louis..
Can you imagine said black nation would 50 years later be treating people how they were treated?. Unfortunately my views are based on my experience of visiting both Israel and Palestine 3 times in the last couple of years. No amount of hypothetical happenings can change the opinions forged by my very own senses
It always seems to me that the people who go rabid, foaming at the mouth about the thought of a cult of Corbyn, seem to be oblivious that they are displaying the attributes of the cult of anti-Corbyn!
Nice Corbynista smear there.
Anyone who critises the Great Leader is "rabid" and "forming at the mouth"
So you don't have to deal with the embarrassing truth of the emperor's New clothes.
No, reasonable opponents point out that whilst he is a decent bloke his policies won't work. I disagree with them, as I think Labour's policies are keynesian Social democratic ones rather than hard left ones but I could be wrong. But to call him a terrorist sympathiser or anti-semite is bordering on the ridiculous and are the behaviours of some form of cultist! Corbyn's makes errors and the way he dealt with anti-semitism could have been much better, also the way he has dealt with Brexit in my opinion, but if you want to portray him as some form of anti-christ you only show yourself up, rather than the supposed cultists you seem to think exist within your own paranoia!
So that smear was aimed at me. At least you're honest enough to admit that.
Only I didn't call him an anti-Semite so your argument collapses @MuttleyCAFC
He hasn't dealt with anti-Semitism which is why it thrives within the labour party.
And he dealt with Brexit brilliantly. He's always been very pro Brexit but managed to con enough people he wasn't to win votes. He now has Owen Jones etc dismissing Brexit fears as first world, middle class problems and telling the faithful to stop going on about it. That dishonesty alone should have opened a lot of eyes but when you're a cult leader you can do no wrong.
It always seems to me that the people who go rabid, foaming at the mouth about the thought of a cult of Corbyn, seem to be oblivious that they are displaying the attributes of the cult of anti-Corbyn!
Nice Corbynista smear there.
Anyone who critises the Great Leader is "rabid" and "forming at the mouth"
So you don't have to deal with the embarrassing truth of the emperor's New clothes.
No, reasonable opponents point out that whilst he is a decent bloke his policies won't work. I disagree with them, as I think Labour's policies are keynesian Social democratic ones rather than hard left ones but I could be wrong. But to call him a terrorist sympathiser or anti-semite is bordering on the ridiculous and are the behaviours of some form of cultist! Corbyn's makes errors and the way he dealt with anti-semitism could have been much better, also the way he has dealt with Brexit in my opinion, but if you want to portray him as some form of anti-christ you only show yourself up, rather than the supposed cultists you seem to think exist within your own paranoia!
So that smear was aimed at me. At least you're honest enough to admit that.
Only I didn't call him an anti-Semite or a terrorist sympathizer so your argument collapses @MuttleyCAFC
He hasn't dealt with anti-Semitism which is why it thrives within the labour party.
And he dealt with Brexit brilliantly. He's always been very pro Brexit but managed to con enough people he wasn't to win votes. He know Owen Jones etc dismissing Brexit fears as first world, middle class problems and telling the faithful to stop going on about it. That dishonesty alone should have opened a lot of eyes but when you're a cult leader you can do no wrong.
Now now, corbyn’s been very clear on anti semitism in the Labour Party, he’s repeatedly told anti semites in the Labour Party in no uncertain terms to just... tone it down a little bit.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
Not sure I am prepared to take advice from Jewish leaders/Ambassador or anyone who backs Netanyahu*. Or from May, who cuddles up to the Saudis and needs the DUP (if you’re talking misogyny & homophobia) to keep her in power.
Corbyn was asked a question by a local journalist, about our club, when he was a couple of miles away from The Valley. He answered in a way that any sensible football fan would want.
The rest is bollocks!
*I just want to make the addendum that I think "Israeli" leaders/apologists would probably be better served here, rather than Jewish. I can't speak as much for Britain, but here in the States I'm really proud of the fact that a lot of Jews of my generation have taken up apartheid and genocide as an important cause, from Sudan to Palestine. And of course even within Israel itself.
Shine alludes to it below, but it's easy for the things to get blurred together. Because I'm Jewish, I don't really have this issue when expressing problems with Israeli policies and settlements, but I know a lot of people who want a fair and lasting agreement who get charges of anti-Semitism thrown at them.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
ok keep spouting the anti semetic bollox and ignoring my question, seems to be the Tory way !
May cant be a 2 faced terrorist funding cunt.... because you said corbyn was first lol. Funny how even the intelligent people on here come across like fucking morons when politics is involved.
I never mentioned May, you did.
I'm no fan of May or the Tory party either but this thread is about Corbyn, the friend of terrorists.
But I was asked for evidence of his friendship with terrorists and provided it.
Unsurprisingly, for the cult of Corbyn, that was immediately dismissed.
You didnt prove anything, you linked a report that asked for him to appologise... I didnt read any proof of his terrorist ties
Despite him calling them friends?
More evidence of Corbyn's labour party's anti-Semitism
In a modern world youre considered anti semitic if youre anti zionist, I am considered anti semitic for supporting Palestine and boycotting isreali products made on stolen land.
One more thing, on the topic of calling someone who wants to have diplomatic talks with problematic or terrorist groups a "terrorist sympathizer," you are desperately mistaken if you think there is anyone in this world who Western Governments like the UK, EU, and US do not have conversations with. We can talk about whether or not it's good to legitimize them through formal talks and all that, but that's a much more nuanced conversation. The fact of the matter is that whatever Governments you agree with and whichever ones you are staunchly opposed to, they're all doing it. And I think it's always worth remembering that such informal backchannels probably prevented a nuclear holocaust during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
Not sure I am prepared to take advice from Jewish leaders/Ambassador or anyone who backs Netanyahu*. Or from May, who cuddles up to the Saudis and needs the DUP (if you’re talking misogyny & homophobia) to keep her in power.
Corbyn was asked a question by a local journalist, about our club, when he was a couple of miles away from The Valley. He answered in a way that any sensible football fan would want.
The rest is bollocks!
*I just want to make the addendum that I think "Israeli" leaders/apologists would probably be better served here, rather than Jewish. I can't speak as much for Britain, but here in the States I'm really proud of the fact that a lot of Jews of my generation have taken up apartheid and genocide as an important cause, from Sudan to Palestine. And of course even within Israel itself.
Shine alludes to it below, but it's easy for the things to get blurred together. Because I'm Jewish, I don't really have this issue when expressing problems with Israeli policies and settlements, but I know a lot of people who want a fair and lasting agreement who get charges of anti-Semitism thrown at them.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
ok keep spouting the anti semetic bollox and ignoring my question, seems to be the Tory way !
May cant be a 2 faced terrorist funding cunt.... because you said corbyn was first lol. Funny how even the intelligent people on here come across like fucking morons when politics is involved.
I never mentioned May, you did.
I'm no fan of May or the Tory party either but this thread is about Corbyn, the friend of terrorists.
But I was asked for evidence of his friendship with terrorists and provided it.
Unsurprisingly, for the cult of Corbyn, that was immediately dismissed.
You didnt prove anything, you linked a report that asked for him to appologise... I didnt read any proof of his terrorist ties
Despite him calling them friends?
More evidence of Corbyn's labour party's anti-Semitism
In a modern world youre considered anti semitic if youre anti zionist, I am considered anti semitic for supporting Palestine and boycotting isreali products made on stolen land.
One more thing, on the topic of calling someone who wants to have diplomatic talks with problematic or terrorist groups a "terrorist sympathizer," you are desperately mistaken if you think there is anyone in this world who Western Governments like the UK, EU, and US do not have conversations with. We can talk about whether or not it's good to legitimize them through formal talks and all that, but that's a much more nuanced conversation. The fact of the matter is that whatever Governments you agree with and whichever ones you are staunchly opposed to, they're all doing it. And I think it's always worth remembering that such informal backchannels probably prevented a nuclear holocaust during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
There i was having a quiet Sunday pint with Diane down my local boozer run by friends, a collective of Nicaraguan micro brewers, when out jumps two bods with a flag of the sadly now defunct CCCP and another with a camera and click click before you could say James Martin Pacelli McGuinness...
Jeremy Corbyn has a historical , publicly stated , antipathy towards war
That's far from unique to him or even people on the left
, the use of weapons of mass destruction and the use of nuclear weapons. Not everyone agrees with his position (we are a democracy after all) , but his foreign policy positions have largely been proved right.
Have they?
As part of this approach he has consistently advocated talking to those who one opposes as a way of bringing people around the table. One might say in the spirit of "Jaw Jaw better than War War". He is right to think this , he is right to act in this fashion , and has been proven so time and time again. Oh, quoting a tory so you must be a tory. Isn't that how the smears work.
Only he doesn't bring people round the table. Give me an example of where he has lead bi-lateral talks or tried to act as a broker? No, he's only spoken to one side, his side as he sees it in his anti-western, anti-imperialist stance.
In fact all political parties in this country take this approach, It is the only logical way to move from war to eventual peace. The difference is this. Whilst JC is open and honest about his approach and his reasons for doing so , other politicians and parties blatantly lie to the British people.
Just not true
During the conflict in Ireland the Conservatives advocated a public position of never talking to terrorists, whilst covertly doing the opposite behind the scenes.
The government did, both parties not just the tories. What they didn't to was take platforms with the UDA or the IRA only, The actually did what you claim Coybyn did but never has.
Being a peacemaker is a difficult and sometimes dirty process. On occasions one will have to appear on platforms with , and say "nice" things to people whom you profoundly disagree with. President Trump had a go at this recently,sharing a platform with a despot who tortures and imprisons his people.
Invalid comparison. One is a president representing his country. Corbyn was a back bench MP. As a minister/prime minister/president part of the role is to deal with and meet people they don't like or agree with. Something Corbyn doesn't do.
So my argument is not that "others do it too" ,
No, actually that is all your argument is. And it's not even your argument. It's the party line from Corbyn.
even though that's patently true , or indeed that JC is at least is honest about it , which is also patently true. My argument is that he ( and others ) are right to do so , even though its difficult , that there is no other way of resolving conflicts than this approach.
He can hardly deny it although plenty of people on here like @MuttleyCAFC and @shine166 are doing just that. So you say he's honest and right to do it but they say it's all lies and paranoia and throw out the smears.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
Not sure I am prepared to take advice from Jewish leaders/Ambassador or anyone who backs Netanyahu*. Or from May, who cuddles up to the Saudis and needs the DUP (if you’re talking misogyny & homophobia) to keep her in power.
Corbyn was asked a question by a local journalist, about our club, when he was a couple of miles away from The Valley. He answered in a way that any sensible football fan would want.
The rest is bollocks!
*I just want to make the addendum that I think "Israeli" leaders/apologists would probably be better served here, rather than Jewish. I can't speak as much for Britain, but here in the States I'm really proud of the fact that a lot of Jews of my generation have taken up apartheid and genocide as an important cause, from Sudan to Palestine. And of course even within Israel itself.
Shine alludes to it below, but it's easy for the things to get blurred together. Because I'm Jewish, I don't really have this issue when expressing problems with Israeli policies and settlements, but I know a lot of people who want a fair and lasting agreement who get charges of anti-Semitism thrown at them.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
ok keep spouting the anti semetic bollox and ignoring my question, seems to be the Tory way !
May cant be a 2 faced terrorist funding cunt.... because you said corbyn was first lol. Funny how even the intelligent people on here come across like fucking morons when politics is involved.
I never mentioned May, you did.
I'm no fan of May or the Tory party either but this thread is about Corbyn, the friend of terrorists.
But I was asked for evidence of his friendship with terrorists and provided it.
Unsurprisingly, for the cult of Corbyn, that was immediately dismissed.
You didnt prove anything, you linked a report that asked for him to appologise... I didnt read any proof of his terrorist ties
Despite him calling them friends?
More evidence of Corbyn's labour party's anti-Semitism
In a modern world youre considered anti semitic if youre anti zionist, I am considered anti semitic for supporting Palestine and boycotting isreali products made on stolen land.
One more thing, on the topic of calling someone who wants to have diplomatic talks with problematic or terrorist groups a "terrorist sympathizer," you are desperately mistaken if you think there is anyone in this world who Western Governments like the UK, EU, and US do not have conversations with. We can talk about whether or not it's good to legitimize them through formal talks and all that, but that's a much more nuanced conversation. The fact of the matter is that whatever Governments you agree with and whichever ones you are staunchly opposed to, they're all doing it. And I think it's always worth remembering that such informal backchannels probably prevented a nuclear holocaust during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
This is the usual tactic of the Corbyn left. "We're not anti-Semitic, just anti-Isreal/Zionist."
But then the mask slips and they says "Jews" or "Jewish" and you see their true colours.
Also note SD sweeping under the carpet of the comment about not “believing Jewish ambassadors” etc. But apparently labour have got anti semitism under control? Just keep sweeping it under the carpet.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
Not sure I am prepared to take advice from Jewish leaders/Ambassador or anyone who backs Netanyahu*. Or from May, who cuddles up to the Saudis and needs the DUP (if you’re talking misogyny & homophobia) to keep her in power.
Corbyn was asked a question by a local journalist, about our club, when he was a couple of miles away from The Valley. He answered in a way that any sensible football fan would want.
The rest is bollocks!
*I just want to make the addendum that I think "Israeli" leaders/apologists would probably be better served here, rather than Jewish. I can't speak as much for Britain, but here in the States I'm really proud of the fact that a lot of Jews of my generation have taken up apartheid and genocide as an important cause, from Sudan to Palestine. And of course even within Israel itself.
Shine alludes to it below, but it's easy for the things to get blurred together. Because I'm Jewish, I don't really have this issue when expressing problems with Israeli policies and settlements, but I know a lot of people who want a fair and lasting agreement who get charges of anti-Semitism thrown at them.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
ok keep spouting the anti semetic bollox and ignoring my question, seems to be the Tory way !
May cant be a 2 faced terrorist funding cunt.... because you said corbyn was first lol. Funny how even the intelligent people on here come across like fucking morons when politics is involved.
I never mentioned May, you did.
I'm no fan of May or the Tory party either but this thread is about Corbyn, the friend of terrorists.
But I was asked for evidence of his friendship with terrorists and provided it.
Unsurprisingly, for the cult of Corbyn, that was immediately dismissed.
You didnt prove anything, you linked a report that asked for him to appologise... I didnt read any proof of his terrorist ties
Despite him calling them friends?
More evidence of Corbyn's labour party's anti-Semitism
In a modern world youre considered anti semitic if youre anti zionist, I am considered anti semitic for supporting Palestine and boycotting isreali products made on stolen land.
One more thing, on the topic of calling someone who wants to have diplomatic talks with problematic or terrorist groups a "terrorist sympathizer," you are desperately mistaken if you think there is anyone in this world who Western Governments like the UK, EU, and US do not have conversations with. We can talk about whether or not it's good to legitimize them through formal talks and all that, but that's a much more nuanced conversation. The fact of the matter is that whatever Governments you agree with and whichever ones you are staunchly opposed to, they're all doing it. And I think it's always worth remembering that such informal backchannels probably prevented a nuclear holocaust during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
This is the usual tactic of the Corbyn left. "We're not anti-Semitic, just anti-Isreal/Zionist."
But then the mask slips and they says "Jews" or "Jewish" and you see their true colours.
Also note SD sweeping under the carpet of the comment about not “believing Jewish ambassadors” etc. But apparently labour have got anti semitism under control? Just keep sweeping it under the carpet.
I read that differently and explained it thus. TelMc can explain what he meant by it.
Also, far from sweeping it under the carpet, I highlighted it for further discussion. I've not condoned Jeremy Cornyn or everything he stands for and everyone he stands with, let alone Labour as a whole, just one comment by a poster in here.
Being Jewish and being accused of overlooking anti-Semitism, or not understanding antisemitic dog whistles, is pretty fucked up. I promise you gents, I have a lot more experience in the subject than you do.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
Not sure I am prepared to take advice from Jewish leaders/Ambassador or anyone who backs Netanyahu*. Or from May, who cuddles up to the Saudis and needs the DUP (if you’re talking misogyny & homophobia) to keep her in power.
Corbyn was asked a question by a local journalist, about our club, when he was a couple of miles away from The Valley. He answered in a way that any sensible football fan would want.
The rest is bollocks!
*I just want to make the addendum that I think "Israeli" leaders/apologists would probably be better served here, rather than Jewish. I can't speak as much for Britain, but here in the States I'm really proud of the fact that a lot of Jews of my generation have taken up apartheid and genocide as an important cause, from Sudan to Palestine. And of course even within Israel itself.
Shine alludes to it below, but it's easy for the things to get blurred together. Because I'm Jewish, I don't really have this issue when expressing problems with Israeli policies and settlements, but I know a lot of people who want a fair and lasting agreement who get charges of anti-Semitism thrown at them.
Assume you are going to vote for the politician that would be be best for Charlton and/or football.
Based on actual statements, who would that be and what have they said?
Not the one who does next to nothing about the rampant anti-Semitism in his party and is a friend to terrorists.
Would love to have you explain how he is a friend to terrorists a phrase you now bandy about .
I doubt that very much but since you asked
"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue talking to terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, in comments that threaten to further destabilise his leadership ahead of the local elections.
The Labour leader refused to denounce the groups in the wake of calls from Jewish leaders, the Israeli Ambassador and members of his own party to distance himself from those with anti-Semitic views.
He has previously referred to the organisations as "friends", despite both being declared terrorist groups by the EU and America."
ok keep spouting the anti semetic bollox and ignoring my question, seems to be the Tory way !
May cant be a 2 faced terrorist funding cunt.... because you said corbyn was first lol. Funny how even the intelligent people on here come across like fucking morons when politics is involved.
I never mentioned May, you did.
I'm no fan of May or the Tory party either but this thread is about Corbyn, the friend of terrorists.
But I was asked for evidence of his friendship with terrorists and provided it.
Unsurprisingly, for the cult of Corbyn, that was immediately dismissed.
You didnt prove anything, you linked a report that asked for him to appologise... I didnt read any proof of his terrorist ties
Despite him calling them friends?
More evidence of Corbyn's labour party's anti-Semitism
In a modern world youre considered anti semitic if youre anti zionist, I am considered anti semitic for supporting Palestine and boycotting isreali products made on stolen land.
One more thing, on the topic of calling someone who wants to have diplomatic talks with problematic or terrorist groups a "terrorist sympathizer," you are desperately mistaken if you think there is anyone in this world who Western Governments like the UK, EU, and US do not have conversations with. We can talk about whether or not it's good to legitimize them through formal talks and all that, but that's a much more nuanced conversation. The fact of the matter is that whatever Governments you agree with and whichever ones you are staunchly opposed to, they're all doing it. And I think it's always worth remembering that such informal backchannels probably prevented a nuclear holocaust during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
This is the usual tactic of the Corbyn left. "We're not anti-Semitic, just anti-Isreal/Zionist."
But then the mask slips and they says "Jews" or "Jewish" and you see their true colours.
Also note SD sweeping under the carpet of the comment about not “believing Jewish ambassadors” etc. But apparently labour have got anti semitism under control? Just keep sweeping it under the carpet.
I read that differently and explained it thus. TelMc can explain what he meant by it.
Also, far from sweeping it under the carpet, I highlighted it for further discussion. I've not condoned Jeremy Cornyn or everything he stands for and everyone he stands with, let alone Labour as a whole, just one comment by a poster in here.
Being Jewish and being accused of overlooking anti-Semitism, or not understanding antisemitic dog whistles, is pretty fucked up. I promise you gents, I have a lot more experience in the subject than you do.
Fair enough, I'm sorry, I didn't know that. And I am genuinely trying to read what Henry posted, but it's really hard to follow angry Twitter threads. And I am also open to reading coherent accounts of systemic anti-semitism and anti-semitic policies within Labour.
I want to state once again I'm not defending Labour's stances or actions surrounding anti-semites within their own party. I was merely trying to bring up and make an important distinction between anti-Israeli sentiment and anti-semitism.
@kentaddick (and Henry as well), I think you guys might be assuming I'm something that I'm not (understandably because of my outspoken leftism). I am not like, say, the "Chapo Trap House wing" (it's weird when podcasts have wings in politics, but they definitely do in this country) who think that Jeremy Corbyn (or Bernie Sanders, for that matter) is the answer to all of the problems of the Left in western politics at the moment. There are things I agree with them on, there are things I don't, with the former being larger than the latter certainly. But that does not mean flaws or biases should be overlooked, far from it, a cult of personality should never blind us from a larger movement, and that movement should be toward inclusion and equality.
You both seem like very smart people whose opinions I certainly take into consideration, even if we don't always agree. I hope this clarifies things a bit.
Thanks @SDAddick, I read your posts on the Trump thread particularly (and I think we agree on that one too), so have seen you post your background before and appreciate your distinction here. I was actually using the language in @Henry Irving's post in saying "Jewish Leaders...", but I understand your distinction and will use it, should the occasion arise, in the future.
There are a number of groups out there, notably Jews for Justice for Palestine and the European Jews for a Just Peace and you are obviously of a like mind. I have a Catholic Northern Irish background and can only be thankful for the GFA and the relative peace that there has been at home over the last 20 years. I can't adequately describe how comforting it is and how grateful I am that my family are living in a far safer environment than when I was a youngster. There's no complacency amongst them though and there are still areas you need to be careful and avoid...but that is so much better than it ever was. The younger generations coming through and and casting aside old prejudices are also growing in number and heartening - and I am so glad to hear you saying the same with you and your peers in the US. If Paisley and McGuinness can become great friends, then there is hope for all.
To get there though was a long struggle and an acknowledgement that there has to be give and take on all sides. I just don't see Israel/Palestine getting to that stage anytime soon. Seeing Israeli leaders and the Ambassador in London defending some of the recent atrocities is clear evidence of that. I hope they can eventually get to a stage where they finally realise that the only way to live in peace is to treat each other with respect and learn to appreciate each other's differences.
I shouldn't be surprised with how the machinations of a Charlton Life thread work and how we ended up here from a comment from a political leader on having football fans on the board but...hey ho!
This is the usual tactic of the Corbyn left. "We're not anti-Semitic, just anti-Isreal/Zionist."
But then the mask slips and they says "Jews" or "Jewish" and you see their true colours.
@Henry Irving quoting on this was just too long, but you posted the above in response to @SDAddick and his response to mine. You railed against someone earlier for allegedly smearing you...looks like you’re quite happy to do it yourself though.
I’ve responded separately to @SDAddick and thanked him. It sounds like we’re of like minds on this and a few other subjects.
This is the usual tactic of the Corbyn left. "We're not anti-Semitic, just anti-Isreal/Zionist."
But then the mask slips and they says "Jews" or "Jewish" and you see their true colours.
@Henry Irving quoting on this was just too long, but you posted the above in response to @SDAddick and his response to mine. You railed against someone earlier for allegedly smearing you...looks like you’re quite happy to do it yourself though.
I’ve responded separately to @SDAddick and thanked him. It sounds like we’re of like minds on this and a few other subjects.
Only @TelMc32 you've just admitted you used the wrong language so you can call it a smear but you said it.
Thanks @SDAddick, I read your posts on the Trump thread particularly (and I think we agree on that one too), so have seen you post your background before and appreciate your distinction here. I was actually using the language in @Henry Irving's post in saying "Jewish Leaders...", but I understand your distinction and will use it, should the occasion arise, in the future.
There are a number of groups out there, notably Jews for Justice for Palestine and the European Jews for a Just Peace and you are obviously of a like mind. I have a Catholic Northern Irish background and can only be thankful for the GFA and the relative peace that there has been at home over the last 20 years. I can't adequately describe how comforting it is and how grateful I am that my family are living in a far safer environment than when I was a youngster. There's no complacency amongst them though and there are still areas you need to be careful and avoid...but that is so much better than it ever was. The younger generations coming through and and casting aside old prejudices are also growing in number and heartening - and I am so glad to hear you saying the same with you and your peers in the US. If Paisley and McGuinness can become great friends, then there is hope for all.
To get there though was a long struggle and an acknowledgement that there has to be give and take on all sides. I just don't see Israel/Palestine getting to that stage anytime soon. Seeing Israeli leaders and the Ambassador in London defending some of the recent atrocities is clear evidence of that. I hope they can eventually get to a stage where they finally realise that the only way to live in peace is to treat each other with respect and learn to appreciate each other's differences.
I shouldn't be surprised with how the machinations of a Charlton Life thread work and how we ended up here from a comment from a political leader on having football fans on the board but...hey ho!
So this is getting sunk but I just wanted to say I didn't see the original quote about "Jewish leaders," but thank you for the explanation, and I'm incredibly happy your family lives in far better conditions than they did 20-25 years ago, and can only hope for the same in the Israel/Palestine conflict.
On the nomenclature thing, I always try to go with as close to "The policies or the current Israeli Government and their supporters" as I can get. Now, you can probably see why I failed in marketing. But as Lenny writing on another thread reminded me, it's not all Israelis who agree with this policy, just as not all Americans agree with Trump (or did Obama or Bush, for that matter).
Anyway, I started to write another few lines about naming conventions but I don't think I'd be telling you anything you don't know, nor would I be breaking new ground. Again, thanks for the explanation.
I sometimes think this forum isn't as good as it used to be, probably due to people's general low interest in Charlton, but threads like this prove me wrong. This would have been sunk in an instance a year ago or so, great stuff, the forum is going through a purple patch!
As for Corbyn's negotiation over war tactics, it's worked out well with Trump (how has he got mentioned on a Corbyn thread?) and Kim Jong-un (how has he got mentioned on a Corbyn thread?) recently.
Trump and Corbyn are two directly opposite sides of the same coin. Both see themselves as disrupters, both claim to be populists, both refuse to criticise their friends, both claim some kind of media conspiracy against them, both have supporters that cannot fathom any kind of criticism or thought that’s isn’t “this guy is the best thing ever”. the difference is Corbyn is not a con man and panders to the left base rather than the right base.
Bingo.
The phrase left/ring wing isn't a horizontal line in which they belong on the extremeties. The reality is more of a circle, and they both meet at the middle.
Watching people on social media with such entrenched mindsets based on very little hard evidence going all out to defend their side of that line is as funny as it is sad.
I'm not particularly clued up on politics, yet I don't claim to be, but there is a faux intellectual dick-waving war that seems to engulf ordinarily sane minded people and turns them into petty, childish idiots. It's not healthy, despite it being amusing.
I should say that this post wasn't particularly directed at anybody on here, but more the Twitter/Facebook exchanges that have been rife in recent years.
Jeremy Corbyn has a historical , publicly stated , antipathy towards war
That's far from unique to him or even people on the left - I did not suggest it was. Just that in the case of JC its so. I don't think you disagree with my assertion.
, the use of weapons of mass destruction and the use of nuclear weapons. Not everyone agrees with his position (we are a democracy after all) , but his foreign policy positions have largely been proved right.
Have they? Yes ....... Ill name a few Iraq ( both times) yes , Ireland yes , Improved relations with Iran yes, arms to Saudi Arabia yes ,
As part of this approach he has consistently advocated talking to those who one opposes as a way of bringing people around the table. One might say in the spirit of "Jaw Jaw better than War War". He is right to think this , he is right to act in this fashion , and has been proven so time and time again.
Oh, quoting a tory so you must be a tory. Isn't that how the smears work. No comment , not playing that game
Only he doesn't bring people round the table. Give me an example of where he has lead bi-lateral talks or tried to act as a broker? No, he's only spoken to one side, his side as he sees it in his anti-western, anti-imperialist stance. - He has not been in a position of power to do so, however parliamentarians of all political persuasions have brought their influence to bear to broker deals of all kinds including peace deals. He has tended to represent the "other " side to where the political establishment have put their loyalty. Its for that reason amongst others I quite like him
In fact all political parties in this country take this approach, It is the only logical way to move from war to eventual peace. The difference is this. Whilst JC is open and honest about his approach and his reasons for doing so , other politicians and parties blatantly lie to the British people.
Just not true - Im afraid it is.
During the conflict in Ireland the Conservatives advocated a public position of never talking to terrorists, whilst covertly doing the opposite behind the scenes.
The government did, both parties not just the tories. What they didn't to was take platforms with the UDA or the IRA only, The actually did what you claim Coybyn did but never has. - I'm not sure I understand your point. The Tories met and negotiated with the IRA whilst telling the British people they would never negotiate with terrorists. That is a matter of historical fact , as is JC open dialogue with Sinn Feinn
Being a peacemaker is a difficult and sometimes dirty process. On occasions one will have to appear on platforms with , and say "nice" things to people whom you profoundly disagree with. President Trump had a go at this recently,sharing a platform with a despot who tortures and imprisons his people.
Invalid comparison. One is a president representing his country. Corbyn was a back bench MP. As a minister/prime minister/president part of the role is to deal with and meet people they don't like or agree with. Something Corbyn doesn't do. So you dont object to the principle of mixing it with nasty people , you just think that the only legitimate people to do so are heads of states or governments. I disagree . All members of parliament represent the constituencies and have the right to bring their influence to bear in all manner of political objectives.
So my argument is not that "others do it too" ,
No, actually that is all your argument is. And it's not even your argument. It's the party line from Corbyn. It wasn't and isn't , and im struggling to see the thought process ( aside perhaps from the desire to win an argument) that leads you to conclude that
even though that's patently true , or indeed that JC is at least is honest about it , which is also patently true. My argument is that he ( and others ) are right to do so , even though its difficult , that there is no other way of resolving conflicts than this approach.
He can hardly deny it although plenty of people on here like @MuttleyCAFC and @shine166 are doing just that. So you say he's honest and right to do it but they say it's all lies and paranoia and throw out the smears. - I'm not in control of what others think or say. Thank the Lord for small mercies
Comments
Can you imagine said black nation would 50 years later be treating people how they were treated?. Unfortunately my views are based on my experience of visiting both Israel and Palestine 3 times in the last couple of years. No amount of hypothetical happenings can change the opinions forged by my very own senses
Only I didn't call him an anti-Semite so your argument collapses @MuttleyCAFC
He hasn't dealt with anti-Semitism which is why it thrives within the labour party.
And he dealt with Brexit brilliantly. He's always been very pro Brexit but managed to con enough people he wasn't to win votes. He now has Owen Jones etc dismissing Brexit fears as first world, middle class problems and telling the faithful to stop going on about it. That dishonesty alone should have opened a lot of eyes but when you're a cult leader you can do no wrong.
Shine alludes to it below, but it's easy for the things to get blurred together. Because I'm Jewish, I don't really have this issue when expressing problems with Israeli policies and settlements, but I know a lot of people who want a fair and lasting agreement who get charges of anti-Semitism thrown at them. One more thing, on the topic of calling someone who wants to have diplomatic talks with problematic or terrorist groups a "terrorist sympathizer," you are desperately mistaken if you think there is anyone in this world who Western Governments like the UK, EU, and US do not have conversations with. We can talk about whether or not it's good to legitimize them through formal talks and all that, but that's a much more nuanced conversation. The fact of the matter is that whatever Governments you agree with and whichever ones you are staunchly opposed to, they're all doing it. And I think it's always worth remembering that such informal backchannels probably prevented a nuclear holocaust during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
This is the usual tactic of the Corbyn left. "We're not anti-Semitic, just anti-Isreal/Zionist."
But then the mask slips and they says "Jews" or "Jewish" and you see their true colours.
Jeremy Corbyn has a historical , publicly stated , antipathy towards war
That's far from unique to him or even people on the left
, the use of weapons of mass destruction and the use of nuclear weapons. Not everyone agrees with his position (we are a democracy after all) , but his foreign policy positions have largely been proved right.
Have they?
As part of this approach he has consistently advocated talking to those who one opposes as a way of bringing people around the table. One might say in the spirit of "Jaw Jaw better than War War". He is right to think this , he is right to act in this fashion , and has been proven so time and time again.
Oh, quoting a tory so you must be a tory. Isn't that how the smears work.
Only he doesn't bring people round the table. Give me an example of where he has lead bi-lateral talks or tried to act as a broker? No, he's only spoken to one side, his side as he sees it in his anti-western, anti-imperialist stance.
In fact all political parties in this country take this approach, It is the only logical way to move from war to eventual peace. The difference is this. Whilst JC is open and honest about his approach and his reasons for doing so , other politicians and parties blatantly lie to the British people.
Just not true
During the conflict in Ireland the Conservatives advocated a public position of never talking to terrorists, whilst covertly doing the opposite behind the scenes.
The government did, both parties not just the tories. What they didn't to was take platforms with the UDA or the IRA only, The actually did what you claim Coybyn did but never has.
Being a peacemaker is a difficult and sometimes dirty process. On occasions one will have to appear on platforms with , and say "nice" things to people whom you profoundly disagree with. President Trump had a go at this recently,sharing a platform with a despot who tortures and imprisons his people.
Invalid comparison. One is a president representing his country. Corbyn was a back bench MP. As a minister/prime minister/president part of the role is to deal with and meet people they don't like or agree with. Something Corbyn doesn't do.
So my argument is not that "others do it too" ,
No, actually that is all your argument is. And it's not even your argument. It's the party line from Corbyn.
even though that's patently true , or indeed that JC is at least is honest about it , which is also patently true. My argument is that he ( and others ) are right to do so , even though its difficult , that there is no other way of resolving conflicts than this approach.
He can hardly deny it although plenty of people on here like @MuttleyCAFC and @shine166 are doing just that. So you say he's honest and right to do it but they say it's all lies and paranoia and throw out the smears.
More labour anti-semitism @SDAddick
Still no comments on these tweets?
I wonder why
Also, far from sweeping it under the carpet, I highlighted it for further discussion. I've not condoned Jeremy Cornyn or everything he stands for and everyone he stands with, let alone Labour as a whole, just one comment by a poster in here.
Being Jewish and being accused of overlooking anti-Semitism, or not understanding antisemitic dog whistles, is pretty fucked up. I promise you gents, I have a lot more experience in the subject than you do.
I want to state once again I'm not defending Labour's stances or actions surrounding anti-semites within their own party. I was merely trying to bring up and make an important distinction between anti-Israeli sentiment and anti-semitism.
@kentaddick (and Henry as well), I think you guys might be assuming I'm something that I'm not (understandably because of my outspoken leftism). I am not like, say, the "Chapo Trap House wing" (it's weird when podcasts have wings in politics, but they definitely do in this country) who think that Jeremy Corbyn (or Bernie Sanders, for that matter) is the answer to all of the problems of the Left in western politics at the moment. There are things I agree with them on, there are things I don't, with the former being larger than the latter certainly. But that does not mean flaws or biases should be overlooked, far from it, a cult of personality should never blind us from a larger movement, and that movement should be toward inclusion and equality.
You both seem like very smart people whose opinions I certainly take into consideration, even if we don't always agree. I hope this clarifies things a bit.
There are a number of groups out there, notably Jews for Justice for Palestine and the European Jews for a Just Peace and you are obviously of a like mind. I have a Catholic Northern Irish background and can only be thankful for the GFA and the relative peace that there has been at home over the last 20 years. I can't adequately describe how comforting it is and how grateful I am that my family are living in a far safer environment than when I was a youngster. There's no complacency amongst them though and there are still areas you need to be careful and avoid...but that is so much better than it ever was. The younger generations coming through and and casting aside old prejudices are also growing in number and heartening - and I am so glad to hear you saying the same with you and your peers in the US. If Paisley and McGuinness can become great friends, then there is hope for all.
To get there though was a long struggle and an acknowledgement that there has to be give and take on all sides. I just don't see Israel/Palestine getting to that stage anytime soon. Seeing Israeli leaders and the Ambassador in London defending some of the recent atrocities is clear evidence of that. I hope they can eventually get to a stage where they finally realise that the only way to live in peace is to treat each other with respect and learn to appreciate each other's differences.
I shouldn't be surprised with how the machinations of a Charlton Life thread work and how we ended up here from a comment from a political leader on having football fans on the board but...hey ho!
This is the usual tactic of the Corbyn left. "We're not anti-Semitic, just anti-Isreal/Zionist."
But then the mask slips and they says "Jews" or "Jewish" and you see their true colours.
@Henry Irving quoting on this was just too long, but you posted the above in response to @SDAddick and his response to mine. You railed against someone earlier for allegedly smearing you...looks like you’re quite happy to do it yourself though.
I’ve responded separately to @SDAddick and thanked him. It sounds like we’re of like minds on this and a few other subjects.
@Henry Irving quoting on this was just too long, but you posted the above in response to @SDAddick and his response to mine. You railed against someone earlier for allegedly smearing you...looks like you’re quite happy to do it yourself though.
I’ve responded separately to @SDAddick and thanked him. It sounds like we’re of like minds on this and a few other subjects.
Only @TelMc32 you've just admitted you used the wrong language so you can call it a smear but you said it.
I take on board @SDAddick’s follow up message and will use his suggestion in future. Suggest you wind your neck in.
On the nomenclature thing, I always try to go with as close to "The policies or the current Israeli Government and their supporters" as I can get. Now, you can probably see why I failed in marketing. But as Lenny writing on another thread reminded me, it's not all Israelis who agree with this policy, just as not all Americans agree with Trump (or did Obama or Bush, for that matter).
Anyway, I started to write another few lines about naming conventions but I don't think I'd be telling you anything you don't know, nor would I be breaking new ground. Again, thanks for the explanation.
The phrase left/ring wing isn't a horizontal line in which they belong on the extremeties. The reality is more of a circle, and they both meet at the middle.
Watching people on social media with such entrenched mindsets based on very little hard evidence going all out to defend their side of that line is as funny as it is sad.
I'm not particularly clued up on politics, yet I don't claim to be, but there is a faux intellectual dick-waving war that seems to engulf ordinarily sane minded people and turns them into petty, childish idiots. It's not healthy, despite it being amusing.
I should say that this post wasn't particularly directed at anybody on here, but more the Twitter/Facebook exchanges that have been rife in recent years.
That's far from unique to him or even people on the left - I did not suggest it was. Just that in the case of JC its so. I don't think you disagree with my assertion.
, the use of weapons of mass destruction and the use of nuclear weapons. Not everyone agrees with his position (we are a democracy after all) , but his foreign policy positions have largely been proved right.
Have they? Yes ....... Ill name a few Iraq ( both times) yes , Ireland yes , Improved relations with Iran yes, arms to Saudi Arabia yes ,
As part of this approach he has consistently advocated talking to those who one opposes as a way of bringing people around the table. One might say in the spirit of "Jaw Jaw better than War War". He is right to think this , he is right to act in this fashion , and has been proven so time and time again.
Oh, quoting a tory so you must be a tory. Isn't that how the smears work. No comment , not playing that game
Only he doesn't bring people round the table. Give me an example of where he has lead bi-lateral talks or tried to act as a broker? No, he's only spoken to one side, his side as he sees it in his anti-western, anti-imperialist stance. - He has not been in a position of power to do so, however parliamentarians of all political persuasions have brought their influence to bear to broker deals of all kinds including peace deals. He has tended to represent the "other " side to where the political establishment have put their loyalty. Its for that reason amongst others I quite like him
In fact all political parties in this country take this approach, It is the only logical way to move from war to eventual peace. The difference is this. Whilst JC is open and honest about his approach and his reasons for doing so , other politicians and parties blatantly lie to the British people.
Just not true - Im afraid it is.
During the conflict in Ireland the Conservatives advocated a public position of never talking to terrorists, whilst covertly doing the opposite behind the scenes.
The government did, both parties not just the tories. What they didn't to was take platforms with the UDA or the IRA only, The actually did what you claim Coybyn did but never has. - I'm not sure I understand your point. The Tories met and negotiated with the IRA whilst telling the British people they would never negotiate with terrorists. That is a matter of historical fact , as is JC open dialogue with Sinn Feinn
Being a peacemaker is a difficult and sometimes dirty process. On occasions one will have to appear on platforms with , and say "nice" things to people whom you profoundly disagree with. President Trump had a go at this recently,sharing a platform with a despot who tortures and imprisons his people.
Invalid comparison. One is a president representing his country. Corbyn was a back bench MP. As a minister/prime minister/president part of the role is to deal with and meet people they don't like or agree with. Something Corbyn doesn't do. So you dont object to the principle of mixing it with nasty people , you just think that the only legitimate people to do so are heads of states or governments. I disagree . All members of parliament represent the constituencies and have the right to bring their influence to bear in all manner of political objectives.
So my argument is not that "others do it too" ,
No, actually that is all your argument is. And it's not even your argument. It's the party line from Corbyn. It wasn't and isn't , and im struggling to see the thought process ( aside perhaps from the desire to win an argument) that leads you to conclude that
even though that's patently true , or indeed that JC is at least is honest about it , which is also patently true. My argument is that he ( and others ) are right to do so , even though its difficult , that there is no other way of resolving conflicts than this approach.
He can hardly deny it although plenty of people on here like @MuttleyCAFC and @shine166 are doing just that. So you say he's honest and right to do it but they say it's all lies and paranoia and throw out the smears. - I'm not in control of what others think or say. Thank the Lord for small mercies